The Supreme Court Says Mandatory Sentencing Of Juveniles To Life Without Parole Would Be Cruel

We might not have gotten a health care decision today, but the
Supreme Court did decide it's unconstitutional to require judges
to sentence juvenile offenders to life in prison without parole.

In the majority opinion, written by Justice
Elena Kagan, the court upheld that the Eighth Amendment forbids
laws that require sentencing a juvenile to life without the
possibility parole, citing the amendment's ban on cruel and
unusual punishment.

The court ruled that juveniles are more likely to be
rehabilitated since their characters aren't as fully formed as
adults'.

In general, courts have agreed minors are less responsible for
their actions than adults.

The Supreme Court has previously ruled out the death penalty for
juveniles, as well life sentences without parole for minors whose
crimes did not involve killing.

The case was decided in a 5 to 4 vote, with Justice Samuel Alito
leading the dissent.

The decision came in response to two cases, one from Arkansas and
one from Alabama.

In the Arkansas case, 14-year-old Jackson allegedly went with two
other boys to rob a video store. One of the boys shot and killed
the store clerk after Jackson entered the store, according to
Monday's opinion.

Prosecutors charged Jackson as an adult on counts of capital
felony murder and aggravated robbery. A trial court convicted him
and imposed a sentence of life without the possibility of parole.

In the second case, 14-year-old Miller and a friend beat
allegedly Miller's neighbor and set fire to his trailer,
according to the Supreme Court opinion.

Even though Miller was initially charged as a juvenile, his case
was eventually moved to adult court, where he was charged with
murder in the course of arson.

A jury found him guilty and sentenced him to life without the
possibility of parole.